IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tcpoxx/v14y2014i1p102-121.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

CBDR&RC in a regime applicable to all

Author

Listed:
  • Harald Winkler
  • Lavanya Rajamani

Abstract

The principle of common, but differentiated, responsibilities and respective capabilities (CBDR&RC) is fundamental to the UNFCCC. Some options for a nuanced model of differentiation that addresses both responsibility and capability in a changing world are explored, such as new categories of countries, and some of the political issues that such a model might face are considered. The strengths and limitations of options for graduation based on 'objective' criteria such that countries could move between categories or 'graduate' - an option provided by the UNFCCC - are discussed. Countries could also choose to join another club (e.g. the G20), self-elect into categories or differentiate among themselves implicitly by accepting different commitments and actions. CBDR&RC will form part of the overall legally binding agreement, and must apply symmetry in some respects and differentiation in others to the commitments and actions contained therein. Some possible characteristics of CBDR&RC of relevance in a regime 'applicable to all' are outlined. These include promoting climate action and using mechanisms available in the UNFCCC to instil dynamism. Differentiation on mitigation must consider the distinctions between absolute and relative reductions, as well as commitments to outcomes and implementation. CBDR&RC should be applied to mitigation, adaptation, and the means of implementation. Policy relevance In Durban, Parties agreed to negotiate a regime 'applicable to all', which sent a political signal that there should be greater symmetry between nations. The world has changed since the UNFCCC was negotiated in 1992. It is now less helpful to think only in terms of two groups of countries (e.g. Annex I and non-Annex I), and evident that there are significant differences between member states. This requires a more nuanced interpretation of the principles of equity and CBDR&RC, which is an integral part of the UNFCCC. The options for the different approaches outlined in this article might help in the construction of a more nuanced model. All must do more, while some must do more still than others. To achieve this, some defining characteristics of CBDR&RC in a regime applicable to all are suggested.

Suggested Citation

  • Harald Winkler & Lavanya Rajamani, 2014. "CBDR&RC in a regime applicable to all," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 102-121, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:14:y:2014:i:1:p:102-121
    DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2013.791184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14693062.2013.791184
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14693062.2013.791184?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kevin Baumert & Odile Blanchard & S. Llosa & James F. Perkaus, 2002. "Building on the Kyoto Protocol : options for protecting the climate," Post-Print halshs-00196316, HAL.
    2. Brouns, Bernd & Ott, Hermann E., 2005. "Taking the lead: post-2012 climate targets for the North: towards adequate and equitable future climate commitments for industrialised countries," Wuppertal Papers 155, Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Axel Michaelowa & Katharina Michaelowa, 2015. "Do rapidly developing countries take up new responsibilities for climate change mitigation?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 133(3), pages 499-510, December.
    2. Ceecee Holz & Guy Cunliffe & Kennedy Mbeva & Pieter W. Pauw & Harald Winkler, 2023. "Tempering and enabling ambition: how equity is considered in domestic processes preparing NDCs," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 271-292, September.
    3. Costantini, Valeria & Sforna, Giorgia & Zoli, Mariangela, 2016. "Interpreting bargaining strategies of developing countries in climate negotiations. A quantitative approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 128-139.
    4. Saurabh Thakur, 2021. "From Kyoto to Paris and Beyond: The Emerging Politics of Climate Change," India Quarterly: A Journal of International Affairs, , vol. 77(3), pages 366-383, September.
    5. Alexander Thompson, 2020. "Emerging Powers and Differentiation in Global Climate Institutions," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 11(S3), pages 61-72, October.
    6. Jean-Charles Hourcade & P.-R. Shukla & Christophe Cassen, 2015. "Climate policy architecture for the Cancun paradigm shift: building on the lessons from history," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 353-367, November.
    7. Ceecee Holz & Sivan Kartha & Tom Athanasiou, 2018. "Fairly sharing 1.5: national fair shares of a 1.5 °C-compliant global mitigation effort," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 117-134, February.
    8. Schleich, Joachim & Dütschke, Elisabeth & Schwirplies, Claudia & Ziegler, Andreas, 2014. "Citizens' perceptions of justice in international climate policy: Empirical insights from China, Germany and the US," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S2/2014, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    9. Harald Winkler & Anya Boyd & Marta Torres Gunfaus & Stefan Raubenheimer, 2015. "Reconsidering development by reflecting on climate change," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 369-385, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Harald Winkler & Bernd Brouns & Sivan Kartha, 2005. "Future mitigation commitments: differentiating among non-Annex I countries," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(5), pages 469-486, September.
    2. Barbara Buchner & Carlo Carraro, 2004. "Economic and environmental effectiveness of a technology-based climate protocol," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 229-248, September.
    3. Winkler, Harald & Baumert, Kevin & Blanchard, Odile & Burch, Sarah & Robinson, John, 2007. "What factors influence mitigative capacity?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 692-703, January.
    4. Onno Kuik & Jeroen Aerts & Frans Berkhout & Frank Biermann & Jos Bruggink & Joyeeta Gupta & Richard S.J. Tol, 2008. "Post-2012 climate policy dilemmas: a review of proposals," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 317-336, May.
    5. Tsikalakis, A.G. & Hatziargyriou, N.D., 2007. "Environmental benefits of distributed generation with and without emissions trading," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 3395-3409, June.
    6. Vicki Duscha & Katja Schumacher & Joachim Schleich & Pierre Buisson, 2014. "Costs of meeting international climate targets without nuclear power," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(3), pages 327-352, May.
    7. Sterk, Wolfgang & Arens, Christof & Beuermann, Christiane & Bongardt, Daniel & Borbonus, Sylvia & Dienst, Carmen & Eichhorst, Urda & Kiyar, Dagmar & Luhmann, Hans-Jochen & Ott, Hermann E. & Rudolph, F, 2009. "Towards an effective and equitable climate change agreement: A Wuppertal proposal for Copenhagen," Wuppertal Spezial, Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy, volume 40, number 40.
    8. Laura Silvia Valente Macedo & Pedro Roberto Jacobi, 2019. "Subnational politics of the urban age: evidence from Brazil on integrating global climate goals in the municipal agenda," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-15, December.
    9. Massimo Tavoni & Shoibal Chakravarty & Robert Socolow, 2012. "Safe vs. Fair: A Formidable Trade-off in Tackling Climate Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(2), pages 1-17, February.
    10. Harald Winkler & Niklas Höhne & Michel Den Elzen, 2008. "Methods for quantifying the benefits of sustainable development policies and measures (SD-PAMs)," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 119-134, March.
    11. Andries Hof & Michel Elzen & Detlef Vuuren, 2010. "Including adaptation costs and climate change damages in evaluating post-2012 burden-sharing regimes," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 19-40, January.
    12. Jonas O. Meckling & Gu Yoon Chung, 2009. "Sectoral approaches for a post-2012 climate regime: a taxonomy," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(6), pages 652-668, November.
    13. Frank Jotzo, 2006. "Quantifying uncertainties for emission targets," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 0603, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
    14. Carraro, Carlo & Buchner, Barbara, 2005. "Regional and Sub-Global Climate Blocs. A Game-Theoretic Perspective on Bottom-up Climate Regimes," CEPR Discussion Papers 5034, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Andrew Kerr Macintosh, 2012. "LULUCF in the post-2012 regime: fixing the problems of the past?," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 341-355, May.
    16. Sandrine Mathy, 2014. "Millennium goals and Climate-Change negotiations : for a climate and development convergence mechanism," Working Papers hal-01083818, HAL.
    17. Frank Jotzo & John Pezzey, 2007. "Optimal intensity targets for greenhouse gas emissions trading under uncertainty," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(2), pages 259-284, October.
    18. Marwa Hannouf & Getachew Assefa, 2017. "The Role of Sustainability Resources of Large Greenhouse Gas Emitters: The Case of Corporations in Alberta, Canada," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-18, January.
    19. Frank Jotzo, 2004. "Developing countries and the future of the Kyoto Protocol," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 0406, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
    20. Atle Christer Christiansen, 2003. "Convergence or divergence? Status and prospects for US climate strategy," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(4), pages 343-358, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:14:y:2014:i:1:p:102-121. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tcpo20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.